New Day . . . or just the same old way?

MAYOR NUTTER, as he reminds us on the other side of this page, has been visiting barbershops and beauty parlors to solicit ideas on how to cope with rapidly shrinking city revenues. And another round of citizen-engagement forums (see box) is also about to get under way.

It's commendable that the administration is engaging the public, whether it is someone getting a shave or at a neighborhood kaffeeklatsch. But for these sessions to be worthwhile, it's important that the right questions be asked.

And we need to begin with the most fundamental question of all:

Exactly what is the role of city government?

The answer to that vexing question can serve as the framework for a discussion on how we spend limited tax dollars - whether on libraries, museums, swimming pools, sports stadiums, sanitation, health or parades.

If we had unlimited funds, or could print money like the federal government, we could do all those things and more. But we don't and can't.

Let me take a crack at answering the question.

I'll take my cues from psychiatrist Abraham Maslow, who developed what's called the hierarchy of needs for individuals. Shaped like a pyramid, the bottom of the pyramid consists of the most basic needs like water, food, shelter, security and safety. At the top of the pyramid are an individual's aspirations, or what Maslow called self-actualization and status needs.

Think of the base as your daytime job and the apex as playing in a rock band at night with your buddies. You might want to quit your daytime job to fulfill your dream of playing lead guitar, but you do need to put food on the family table.

Maslow said people must feel secure, safe and able to manage the basics of life before they can get excited about climbing the pyramid to the next level. Self-actualization and image needs have to wait until the basics are attended to.

So using Maslow's hierarchy as a guide, it's clear that the primary role of government must be to first meet those basic needs.

ON THE top of my list would be things like sanitation, street maintenance and bridge safety. We also need to provide safe water, be alert to infectious diseases and have a way for disposing of human waste. We need law enforcement to provide a safe environment for residents and visitors and a fire department to prevent and put out fires.

These services are not only essential but also required by virtually all Philadelphians, regardless of income.

Now let's leapfrog to the top of Maslow's pyramid, where we gratify our other needs. These are things that might make us feel better about ourselves and our city but aren't necessary for survival. And just as the pyramid narrows at the top, so do the number of people who benefit from these items.

A couple of examples that have recently made the news: a $250,000 city grant to the Philadelphia Orchestra, the city's superboxes at Citizens Bank Park, the Linc and the Wachovia Center, the Mummers Parade. We all have our own examples, and they will provoke ample debate and stir up their defenders.

One person's perk is another's necessity.

There is also another level that doesn't appear in Maslow's hierarchy but that I'd call self-aggrandizement needs. It's judges having personal aides; it's too many city cars, too many coordinators for special groups, whether it be veterans, gays, bike riders, the arts, the environment; it's people who are able to retain jobs not because of ability or need but because they have a political "rabbi."

Now in between the top and bottom of Maslow's hierarchy is where we find important needs or services that don't rise to the importance of supporting life and safety, even though they serve a large number of residents and provide an important sense of community.

This is where I'd place libraries and swimming pools, for example.

If we're indeed going to close some swimming pools or libraries because we can't afford them, shouldn't we first be eliminating some of the programs and services at the top of the pyramid? A $250,000 gift to the orchestra, for example, could be used instead to maintain five swimming pools. And monetizing the city's sports boxes by selling the tickets could save at least another 10 pools.

And we're just beginning. We have an entire group under the self-aggrandizement category.

Admittedly, this is a rudimentary look at the role of city government - the reality is far more complicated. For example, I haven't even mentioned education, which is primarily a state function, though critical to the city.

But in this season of financial misery, we actually have a golden opportunity to identify and prioritize the role of city government.

Will we ever have a better time for our political leadership - in all branches of government - to separate the wheat from the chaff and discard the chaff rather than the wheat?

Until they do that, we don't have a financial crisis, we have a political crisis. And it won't be a New Day, just another Groundhog Day. *

Phil Goldsmith served as managing director of the city from 2003-2005.